Zapadna medicina ne može biti autoritet na području prehrane i nutricionizma. Zašto?
Zato što ima previše politike. To je dokazano autorskim radom briljantnog matematičara Ioannidis. On je bio math prodigy. Prodigy je netko tko već kao dijete dođe do stupnja odraslog majstora (npr Mozart, Bethoven, Fischer u šahu itd). Taj rad je prihvaćen od strane službene medicine (ali naravno nije razglašen u svim novimama i TV postajama).
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/pri ... ce/308269/
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... -medicine/
Znači i do 90% objavljenih informacije ja manjkavo. Zašto je manjkavo i što to znači?He charges that as much as 90 percent of the published medical information that doctors rely on is flawed. His work has been widely accepted by the medical community; it has been published in the field’s top journals, where it is heavily cited; and he is a big draw at conferences. Given this exposure, and the fact that his work broadly targets everyone else’s work in medicine, as well as everything that physicians do and all the health advice we get, Ioannidis may be one of the most influential scientists alive. Yet for all his influence, he worries that the field of medical research is so pervasively flawed, and so riddled with conflicts of interest, that it might be chronically resistant to change—or even to publicly admitting that there’s a problem.
Znači unaprijed se kreće sa rezultatima koje žele dobiti i tako postave studije da dobiju te rezultate. I to u 90% slučajeva.“The studies were biased,” he says. “Sometimes they were overtly biased. Sometimes it was difficult to see the bias, but it was there.” Researchers headed into their studies wanting certain results—and, lo and behold, they were getting them. We think of the scientific process as being objective, rigorous, and even ruthless in separating out what is true from what we merely wish to be true, but in fact it’s easy to manipulate results, even unintentionally or unconsciously. “At every step in the process, there is room to distort results, a way to make a stronger claim or to select what is going to be concluded,” says Ioannidis. “There is an intellectual conflict of interest that pressures researchers to find whatever it is that is most likely to get them funded.”
Ne želim ići preduboko u članak ali očito je da zapadna medicina ne može nikako biti autoritet u nutricionizmu (pa čak ni u medicini).
I gledajmo što su preproučivali kroz povijest:
- šećer, žitne pahuljice, margarin, suconkretovo ulje, danas canola ulje i aspartam.
Srećom postoji alternativa u narodima koji su živjeli bez "dobrobiti" zapadne civilizacije - bez bijelog brašna, šećera itd. I oni su imali fascinantno zdravlje u usporedbi sa ljudima koji su živjeli u isto vrijeme a jeli zapadne gluposti. Također su imali mudrost da slušaju svoje tijelo i davali trudnicama i maloj djeci posebnu hranu tipa maslac (koji zapadna medicina kaže da nije ni dobar ni loš).
Postojao je netko tko je istraživao to na znanstven način ali su mu rezultati marginalizirani zato što ne ide na ruku zapadnoj medicini gdje je 90% objavljenih rezultata manjkavo. Po meni oni su najbolji autoritet za prehranu na planetu - westonaprice fundacija.
Preporučujem ovaj video za početak (Introduction to the Works of Dr Weston A. Price - Sally Fallon Morell)
http://vimeo.com/wisetraditionsuk
I ovu knjigu za malo znanosti i puno recepata:
http://www.amazon.com/Nourishing-Tradit ... 0967089735